[kmfrk]

Were this in any other context - an inane weekend project, or faux start-up that is just a website - as we've seen a billion times before, people would spout the same mantras about charging from the start, hustling, going for it, and what not.

I don't know if people are making a fuzz because it's about Hacker News, or if they just don't believe the mantra they keep repeating, when they finally have put their money where their mouth is.

Charging for this app means the developer's time is valuable; releasing it for free would suggest that s/he does it to get a job. It also means that traction will let the developer improve the app over time to the benefit of people who subscribe to the idea.

I am perfectly open to a discussing on pricing it 2.99 instead of 4.99, but I can't be bothered by the outcries to make it free.

EDIT: I just saw that the developer even released the source code on GitHub. That's about as good as it can get.

[veyron]

Note: a complaint about price isn't a plea to make it free -- I wrote a longer response on another reply. It's opening a conversation about why the app deserves ____'s money

[kmfrk]

Both our arguments can be generalized to a straw man; I haven't read your specific comment, but I am sure we agree with each other. I am saying that people are being jerks, when they would have sung the developer's praises in another context, and you are saying that it's fine to ask a developer about why their product is desirable and worth someone's money.

It's fine to ask a person about what sets the app apart, and how it works, when they pay for it, and because it's fun to have a developer pitch their product, as is our wont on HN. What bothers me is the immense hypocrisy when people get downright hostile like this - like some do in this thread.

If the hostile people could get their head out of their ass, they could discuss the app on the basis of whether it was a sustainable business model - not an affront to their delicate, incongruous sensibilities.